80% of crime in Australia is committed by Lab and Lib supporters and voters

Parliament has a policy of "Harm Minimization" - drugs are tolerated

Whether AVOs work or not, the mother withdrew it but at the same time reckoned the father would kill her son

Her son said "I don't want to go back to Daddy" - did he mean it? He already knew what Daddy was like

Mother decides to leave her son with Daddy. Her son gets murdered

Tax payers pay Daddy's keep for next thirty years

This is the Lib Lab world we live in

"I'm DRUGGED to the eyeballs, as ANGRY as hell, and not thinking straight. I'm gonna go KILL someone in my family!". 

"Um, there's a piece of paper that says you can't go near them". 

"Oh, really? I forgot about that. I'll give it a miss then". 

Lots of emotional hysteria in his thread, very little based on the facts.

Like it or not, the government is not going to start splitting up families who do not want to be split up. It always does more harm than good, and for every case like this there are thousands that do not escalate. If the mother is unwilling to lift a finger to sign a piece of paperwork, she cannot blame the government for not coming to her rescue. It is not the government's job to micromanage who a single mother chooses to live with or to help people who do not want to be helped.

freediver wrote on Sep 5^th, 2019 at 12:40pm:



Yes she can will.



It the duty of the 'caring society' to care for the abusers of others.


e.g.
WWW search....
child rapist, murder, Michael Guider will be released today







We employ politicians, legally, to be our stewards.

I'm not happy, with how our stewards are conducting their duties of care, towards us, Australian citizens, and the nation.

But YOU keep keep voting for the incumbents who keep making the same mistakes.

And that only encourages them.

Dumb.

Very, dumb.



steward = =
1 a person who looks after the passengers on a ship or aircraft.
2 a person responsible for supplies of food to a college, club, etc.
3 an official appointed to supervise arrangements at a large public event.
4 short for shop steward.
5 a person employed to manage another’s property, especially a large house or estate.


incumbent = =
1 (incumbent on/upon) necessary for (someone) as a duty or responsibility.
2 (of an official or regime) currently holding office.

Agnes wrote on Sep 5^th, 2019 at 2:01pm:



It is a crime, to rob, or steal, or break other [righteous] laws      [laws which are intended to protect the peace and the property of ALL law abiding people].

.....whether a person is wealthy or poor.


Being poor, is NOT a rational justification for any kind, of criminal activity.

freediver wrote on Sep 5^th, 2019 at 12:40pm:


Actually, It's often the police taking out AVOs on the mother's behalf. The "victim" is a mere "witness" in proceedings. Magistrates often put AVOs into effect for people who don't request or want them. No one "signs" AVOs into effect.

Our criminal legal system is based on the Crown verses defendants, so yes, the way the law sees it, it is the government's job to protect and manage citizens.

Nobody presses charges in Australia, the police do, often against the will of victims themselves.

freediver wrote on Sep 5^th, 2019 at 10:15pm:


You remove an order by going to court and requesting it. A magistrate decides.

There are no separation orders. The crown (police, courts) can only put an AVO in place to prevent a "victim" from a "defendent" or "suspect".

I've seen it time and time again between parents and their kids. A child often has to move out because of an AVO his parents haven't requested.

It's quite common for police to get sick of being called out to arguments and just whack an AVO in place.

This is also a stock standard police response to allegations of sibling sexual abuse.

Apart from traffic duty, policing is almost entirely domestic now. Like it or not, the government have been dragged into the family home. Police have been forced to become social workers, and It's not usually a job they enjoy doing.